Monday, May 30, 2011
Just about two days ago, I stumbled across this web page and found a fellow heteroactivist under attack. I decided to wade into this fray and test one of my Achilles questions against his most eloquent attacker.
I asked Mr. Scott Rose...
Do you support how some sex education classes for grades K thru 6 welcome schoolchildren INTO the glbt community WITHOUT the consent or knowledge of that child’s parents?
His response was...
"Enlightened human beings of whatever sexual orientation constantly interrelate with one another, as sexual relations are far from being the only thing of importance in life. For example, a heterosexual man with an interest in sailing could very well go out on a lake one day in a sailboat with a lesbian couple and the lesbian couple's children. The way you have phrased your question, Carl Rowan Morris, conspicuously implies that LGBT adults around children in the ages of K through 6th grade would commit child rape on those children. The direct evidence suggests that Catholic priests are far more likely that non-priest LGBT adults to rape children. Anti-gay bigot adults, on the other hand, absolutely should not be permitted to endanger their children's welfare by teaching them irrational anti-gay hate. The children taught that hate by their parents are the ones who become anti-gay bullies in school. That bullying besides damaging the gay victims also hinders the bully from receiving the best possible education. So to answer your question, yes, it is terrible for anti-gay bigot parents to hinder their offsprings' enlightened integration into the contemporary world by teaching them homophobia, the irrational fear of gay human beings, which you have expressed with your stupid question."
Mr Rose's is so fancy and so eloquent as he accuses me of implying child rape, WHILE he admits his support of violating the civil rights of parents that won't support the sexual actions of the glbt community. He calls speaking to a child about ENTERING the gay community, behind the backs of that child's parents, an "enlightened integration into the contemporary world."
Wow. That was some of the smoothest poison I've ever heard.
Isn't Mr. Scott Rose himself guilty of bigotry when he openly advocates the violation of another person's civil rights after he labels that person an "anti-gay bigot"? Isn't it possible to teach kids not to bully each other without glorifying homosexuality? Does Mr. Rose hate those who don't support the concept of a man having sex with another man (anti-gay bigotry according to him) so much that he advocates taking their children away from them? Look at the paragraph marked May 27th at 3:17pm. How will he respond to my question..."How are you better than "anti-gay bigots" when you openly admit your support of violating a parent's right to supervise their child's education?
Again, my evidence is here.
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Friday, May 27, 2011
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Well. Here it is again. People denying the obvious differences between the human male and the human female. American culture is taking yet another step away from sexual sanity and teaching children that they are the gender that they think they are, regardless of what's between their legs.
Where do I buy stock in a company that provides materials and curriculum for homeschooling because, when more people find out about what's being taught to their kids, homeschooling is going to explode.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Just like I constructed the word "heteroseparatist" to free those who embrace sexual normalcy from being marginalized, I created the word "genderealist" to counteract the derisive term "heterosexist." (How crazy are human beings going to become in my lifetime?!)
A couple in Canada are refusing to tell anyone the gender of their child. Wow. Okay.
Now, these people have every right to withhold this information from people, and I'm not disputing their parental rights to do so, but why would they do this? Is this the kind of World that gays, feminists, and liberals want? Is ignoring gender the tie that binds the gays and the feminists? What's next? Will I be thrown in jail for saying "Miss" or "Sir" in the future? Am I going to live the life of Harrison Bergeron?
Story here and here.
Sunday, May 22, 2011
How does the 6,000+ year-old definition of marriage violate the civil rights of gay people? I don't get it. Every member of the glbt community in the United States of America grew up in a country where marriage is defined as being between one man and one woman, yet now gays are claiming/believing that such a definition is a violation of their civil rights. What? What did you say? You're equating your sexual behavior to race? Waaaa? Are you crazy!
Now, the people of Minnesota get to vote on a Constitutional amendment that defines marriage. How could anybody be upset at that? Story here, here and here.
Friday, May 20, 2011
Whenever I ask someone who belongs to the glbt community to denounce how some in the gay community want to speak to children about entering their lifestyle, without the consent of that child's parents, they almost always go ballistic.
Then they come at me with an avalanche of propaganda designed to distract me from the fact that they won't disavow the glbt violation of the civil rights of some parents. How odd. How strange. It seems that homopocrisy runs very deep. How did I wake up in a country where a person would openly admit their desire to pull children into homosexuality? If a person is born gay, they will still be gay when they are 18, so why do some gays insist on access to children without parental consent?
Well. It looks like Tennessee is waking up to reality and taking a stand against those who would come at children behind the backs of their parents about sexual matters. How could any sane person have a problem with that? Doesn't a person prove that they are a danger to children when they support doing an end-run around the civil rights of that child's parents? WHO CAN DISPUTE THAT?
I don't know much about this guy, but he speaks with great clarity. I hear so much propaganda that I'm now at a point where I'm almost shocked by clarity. Though I walk through the valley of homofascism, I shall not fear, for I am with the Lord.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
99.99% of human beings are born male or female. (Then there are the Caster Semenya types of the World.) Some people reject their own genital and decide that they want to go from male to female or vice versa. This decision is a rejection of sexual sanity and a clear indication of gross parental failure. One of the greatest current examples of this is Chaz Bono, who just doesn't want to be a girl anymore.
Yesterday I found an article that stunned me with its clarity and courage. And, it was written by a psychiatrist (which should silence my recent batch of homofascist hecklers). Dr. Keith Ablow's article is here.
Monday, May 16, 2011
Dear Voice of Reason, (VoR for short) I've seen your last two comments and I've decided to clear up a matter before I accept any more of your posts. I think that I've figured out something about you.
Because of my experiences with comments about my posts, I've developed a process of figuring out key pieces of information by formulating a key question.
I must preface my question to you with the following statement; I hereby denounce speaking to any child about the Lord Jesus Christ and I denounce recruiting children into the heterosexual lifestyle, WITHOUT the consent of that child's parents.
Now. That being said. VoR, can you match me by stating that you won't support gays that wish to tell children that joining the glbt community is okay, WITHOUT the knowledge or consent of that child's parents? Because if you can't, that will tell me how far your support for the glbt community goes.
I know how some people like to throw up a smoke screen when they're dodging a simple question so I'll make it clear that I'm not talking about the mere mention of the existence of homosexuals in the anti-bullying classes taught to schoolkids. I'm specifically talking about those in the gay community that wouldn't hesitate to tell a child that entering the glbt community is okay, WITHOUT the consent of that child's parents.
So, Voice of Reason, this is the question I'm presenting to you. Will you denounce how some adults in the glbt community will tell a child/person under the age of 16, that it okay for them to BE gay, WITHOUT the consent of their parents?
Sunday, May 15, 2011
I haven't heard of anyone being fired for supporting the redefinition of marriage, yet I do hear of people being fired and harassed for supporting God's definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.
Oh but wait! It's Canada where homofascism was legitimized by legalizing same-sex "marriage." The members of the glbt community want me to believe that legalizing homosexual "marriage" in my country won't affect my marriage, and then I read this. If I'm fired for standing for true marriage, won't that adversely effect mine?
Saturday, May 14, 2011
When I first started this blog, I thought that nobody would believe me if I said that the glbt community was after children. My plan was to simply gather evidence to support my point whenever my heteroseparatist philosophy was challenged. But, even when I present the facts of homofascist behavior, there are still those that refuse to accept the horror of the doctrine of the gay community; the pursuit of the minds and hearts of children, WITHOUT the consent of their parents.
I guess I was naive to think that those who supported the glbt community, beyond the understandable point of standing against the bullying of gays, would be shocked back into reality when I showed how some/most gays would go so far as to pursue children with the full knowledge that that child's parents did NOT want their child being taught that homosexuality was okay.
But yesterday, I found the second greatest example of child-endangering-homofascism that I've ever seen. I read it three times to make sure I wasn't hallucinating. Read how this homosexual homofascist plans to proudly and knowingly violate the civil rights of parents by approaching children about homosexuality without parental consent. He even supports raising boys to have sex with men when they grow up! I wonder at what age he considers a boy old enough to have sex with?
"...I for one certainly want tons of school children to learn that it’s OK to be gay, that people of the same sex should be allowed to legally marry each other, and that anyone can kiss a person of the same sex without feeling like a freak. And I would very much like for many of these young boys to grow up and start f****** men. I want lots of young ladies to develop into young women who voraciously ***** ***. I want this just as badly as many parents want their own kids to grow up ********** to trade proteins and forcefully excrete a baby. .."
Story here, here, and here.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
How does gay "marriage" affect mine? I could get fired for supporting true marriage. Story here and (as of 17 May 2011) here.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Gay is behavior, not race. To swap out the word,"Black" for "gay" is wrong because the color of a person's skin is morally benign and a person's sexual conduct is never morally benign.
The Boy Scouts acknowledge God and his laws. Boy Scouts are; trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent. I memorized these twelve words, in this sequence, over 38 years ago.
A person cannot embrace sexual sin and be reverent. Therefore, all those who wish to embrace sexual sin cannot be a part of the BSA. Leave it to anti-Christ, "gay activists," to want to destroy the Boy Scouts of America for their reverence for God's laws.
Friday, May 6, 2011
Do I have the same right that "gay activists" do when it comes to word-replacement-arguments?
What if Judge Walker believed in polygamy, was in a long term sexual relationship with multiple women, was about to retire, and worked in Salt Lake City, Utah?
If, under the above mentioned conditions, he then threw out a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as being between one man and one woman... how would his actions be seen? Wouldn't the personal gain of his decision be an obvious disqualifier?
“It is important to emphasize at the outset that we are not suggesting that a gay or lesbian judge could not sit on this case,” the group’s attorneys said in their motion, which was submitted to the district court. “Rather, our submission is grounded in the fundamental principle, reiterated in the governing statute, that no judge ‘is permitted to try cases where he has an interest in the outcome.’ ”
My supporting evidence is here.
The man's argument could be better, but he still makes some valid points about the redefinition of marriage. Especially about how interracial marriage always existed, and homosexual "marriage" never has.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Well beloved readers it's happened again. A homosexual is mad at me for using my freedom of speech, (that I have paid for via income tax) to denounce an act of arson against the property of a gay man. I'm not making this up.
This little heckler calls himself, "Absolutely Not Annonymous." He rejects Jesus Christ, has sex with men, and he's mad at me. He's been accusing me of some wanting to "wish gays out of existence," and other homophobic beliefs. He apparently hates my hate-free refusal to support the glbt community and his gay lifestyle. His attacks have become really hard to understand, so I'm going to give him his own post so we can fight one-on-one. As always, I will allow no one but him to comment on this post. I know how heckler-class gays like to group-attack.
I'm making him choose a shorter name so we can talk. I think that that's fair. I'm not going going to cite such a long name every time I address him here and in future posts.